The Federal Court will today rule on whether former Speaker Peter Slipper will stand trial over sexual harassment allegations.

In October Mr Slipper officially resigned as Speaker of the House of Representatives after coming under pressure from key independents.

He had stood aside in April when his former staffer, James Ashby, lodged a sexual harassment case against him.

The case included allegations Mr Slipper made unwanted sexual comments and encouraged him to shower with the door open while sharing a flat in Canberra.

Mr Slipper has since apologised for text messages that contained vulgar euphemisms for female genitalia and one calling Liberal frontbencher Sophie Mirabella an "ignorant botch" (sic).

Today the Federal Court in Sydney will rule on whether to throw out Mr Ashby's sexual harassment claim or set a trial date for it.

Mr Slipper, who represented himself at his last court appearance, is trying to have the case thrown out on the grounds it is vexatious and an abuse of the legal process.

He has argued the case is about "destabilising the Federal Government", and damaging him politically and financially.

Mr Slipper has also alleged Mr Ashby's allegations were "gratuitous, salacious and immaterial".

The Commonwealth has already agreed to pay $50,000 as part of a legal settlement with Mr Ashby, after he accused it of not providing a safe workplace.

At the time of settlement a spokesman for Mr Ashby said the case was settled on "favourable" grounds, and the Government agreed to provide better training for MPs and staff.

Justice Steven Rares has previously heard that Mr Ashby deliberately picked Harmers Workplace Lawyers to represent him when his case was first lodged because they were known for "using the media to apply the blowtorch" and "notorious" for the uninhibited way they use the media to apply pressure in cases.

The law firm represented Kristy Fraser-Kirk in her highly publicised case against former David Jones chief executive Mark McInnes.

The judge has also previously referred to the small amounts of money potentially involved and Mr Ashby has stated the case is about achieving justice, not money.